>professor's PhD thesis is unoriginal

>>8364559
those that can't do, teach

>>8364559
>>8364569

Einstein was a plagiarist, read:

https://www.amazon.com/Albert-Einstein-Incorrigible-Christopher-Bjerknes/dp/0971962987

>>8364559
>https://www.amazon.com/Albert-Einstein-Incorrigible-Christopher-Bjerknes/dp/0971962987
>>8364569
>>8364575

This is a good video that goes with Bjerknes' book:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkMiWH4n1lw

>>8364575
everyone knew he was parroting at the time. he explained the theory well enough for the layman to understand it, thats all. read the preface in General and Special Relativity.
I cant believe someone wrote a book about it though, pretty hilarious. Sure, people credit him today with discovering Relativity but he did not take any credit whatsoever for it.

>>8364575
I-is this for real?
Is there any free version?

>>8364575
In the formal sense he could have been. But if he avoided giving credit to previous works, does that devaluates his ?

File: arafatnetan.jpg (196KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 800x1200px

guess how I know you're arab?

>>8364929
What does this have to do with being Arab?
Back to /pol/ you lunatic, keep your nonsense off of /sci/.

>>8364612
>everyone knew he was parroting at the time. he explained the theory well enough for the layman to understand it, thats all. read the preface in General and Special Relativity.
>I cant believe someone wrote a book about it though, pretty hilarious.

I will copy pasta the unintentionally hilarious beginning of the amazon description of the book:

https://www.amazon.com/Albert-Einstein-Incorrigible-Christopher-Bjerknes/dp/0971962987

below for anyone who wants a chuckle:

The name "Einstein" evokes images of genius, but was Albert Einstein, in fact, a plagiarist, who copied the theories of Lorentz, Poincare, Gerber, and Hilbert? A scholarly documentation of Albert Einstein's plagiarism of the theory of relativity, "Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist" discloses Einstein's method for manipulating credit for the work of his contemporaries, reprints the prior works he parroted, and demonstrates through formal logical argument that Albert Einstein could not have drawn the conclusions he drew without prior knowledge of the works he copied, but failed to reference. Numerous republished quotations from Einstein's contemporaries prove that they were aware of his plagiarism.....

"[Einstein's] paper 'Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Koerper' in Annalen der Physik. . . contains not a single reference to previous literature. It gives you the impression of quite a new venture. But that is, of course, as I have tried to explain, not true." -- Max Born

Quote- "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." -- Albert Einstein

>>8364923
>I-is this for real?
>Is there any free version?

I think there is a free version of the Bjerknes book available for download here:

http://draftees.goodwinhost.com/albert-einstein-the-incorrigible-plagiarist-download/

Let us know what you think of it.

File: _zog_bilderberg-resize_75.jpg (2MB, 2576x2220px)

2MB, 2576x2220px

>>8364559
>>8364569
>>8364577
>>8364612
>>8364923
>I-is this for real?
>>8364926
>if he avoided giving credit to previous works, does that devaluates his ?

Here are some Cliff's notes that are not from the Bjerknes book, but rather from my own memory of how it went down:

(1) READ THIS FIRST:

http://ckraju.net/misc/Einstein.html

Einstein denies reading Henri Poincaré's 1904 paper on the theory of relativity even though he appears to superficially use the same German language terms in his own 1905 paper on relativity (this plagiarism would not be obvious if you don't speak German). Einstein says in interviews that he has read all of Poincaré's earlier papers *EXCEPT* for the later paper that some people accuse him of plagiarizing (i.e. Einstein said- "I read all of Poincaré's papers except that one).

(2) To summarize- "Special Relativity" plagiarized both the work of Lorentz and Poincare, and Wein proposed jointly awarding the 1912 Nobel Prize to both Lorentz and Einstein at the same time, although AFAIK nobody was ever awarded a Nobel prize for either the special or general theories of relativity, see:

http://mathpages.com/rr/s8-08/8-08.htm

(3) Henri Poincaré seems to have already derived E=mc^2 in the 1890's way before Einstein, except that Poincaré wrote it as "m = E/c^2", so you would have to multiply both sides of the equation by (c^2) algebraically to get E=mc^2 from that, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_priority_dispute

and this equation was also called the "De Pretto Equation" before Einstein published it, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olinto_De_Pretto#Contributions_to_physics_and_energy.E2.80.93mass-equivalence

(4) Poincaré had described a synchronization procedure for clocks at rest relative to each other. So two events, which are simultaneous in one frame of reference, are not simultaneous in another frame.

(5) David Hilbert also fully derived general relativity 5 days before Einstein

>>8364953
>Quote- "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." -- Albert Einstein

He never said this you fuckwit. Stop making shit up.

>>8364975
This is complete bullshit. He didn't even derive "E = mc^2" in his paper, he derived the more general mass-energy-momentum equation. You think Hilbert wouldn't have said something if he got to GR first? There would have been a massive public outcry.

>>8364953
> just because the media credits Einstein with discovering relativity, he also credits himself with the discovery
If we were to give credit to everyone involved in the discovery, the list would be as follows
Albert Einstein, Hendrik Lorentz, Henri Poincaré, and Hermann Minkowski, Woldemar Voigt, August Föppl, Joseph Larmor, Emil Cohn, Friedrich Hasenöhrl, Max Planck, Max von Laue, Gilbert Newton Lewis and Richard Chase Tolman, Einstein, Marcel Grossmann, and David Hilbert. Many others (such as Gauss, Riemann, William Kingdon Clifford, Ricci, and Levi-Civita) and (possibly) Paul Gerber.

>>8364958
It doesn't work.

>>8365042

Thanks for the info

>>8365015
There was, but it was not initiated by Hilbert.
I think it's generally accepted that Hilbert nearly had it worked out, and his correspondence with Einstein allowed him to finish it up.
That's why we called it the Einstein-Hilbert action.

>>8365015
>This is complete bullshit
>>8365316
>it was not initiated by Hilbert.

Why do you make claims without providing sources or citations?

My citations were this:

http://ckraju.net/misc/Einstein.html

and Henri Poincaré seems to have already derived E=mc^2 in the 1890's way before Einstein, except that Poincaré wrote it as "m = E/c^2", so you would have to multiply both sides of the equation by (c^2) algebraically to get E=mc^2 from that, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_priority_dispute

and this equation was also called the "De Pretto Equation" before Einstein published it, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olinto_De_Pretto#Contributions_to_physics_and_energy.E2.80.93mass-equivalence

>>8365316
>it's generally accepted that Hilbert nearly had it worked out, and his correspondence with Einstein allowed him to finish it up.

LOL, now I am wondering if Hilbert and Einstein's correspondence was something like this insane family guy parody:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkMiWH4n1lw

>>8365106

No problem.

>>8365682
How about you study what you're trying to argue first?
What poincaré derived is eletromagnetic mass.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_mass

What einstein derived is a more general equivalence.
Eisnteins's theory of relativity aren't E=mc^2, but rather that is a consequence of relativity (from E^2 = (mc^2) + (pc)^2, as the relation itself was already known.

>>8365976
>E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
Forgot that ^2.

>>8365316
>There was, but it was not initiated by Hilbert.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9rR1kOFSbM

You need to provide a citation proving that it was not initiated by Hilbert.

>>8366311

Still waiting on that citation.

>>8366335

Keeping this thread alive until you post a citation proving that your argument is correct and that you are not simply lying on the internet.

File: von_Manstein.jpg (151KB, 593x798px)

151KB, 593x798px

>>8364929

I have no idea why you would think OP is an Arab. Anybody is free to debate science and the history of science on this board regardless of the color of their skin and regardless of theiir racial or ethnic background

>>8366597
I'll help. I am interested in the truth.

>>8367263

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXvi8uD8qYY

Thank you. I am also interested in openly debating the truth myself as long as both sides of the debate provide citations to their sources so that I can do my own fact checking.

>>8364953
He would still have general relativity, Brownian movement and the photoeletric effect, right?